Friday, July 26, 2013

Egypt, Brazil, Turkey: Tremors of World Revolution

The dramatic events in Turkey, Brazil and Egypt are a graphic indication thatwe have now entered an entirely new situation on a world scale. We need toexamine the fundamental processes in order to combat any tendency toroutinism.

Since the Second World War there have been seven recessions, but this isthe most serious recession in history. The rate of recovery is far slowerthan any slump in the past hundred years. Five years after the beginning ofthe crisis, the world economy remains mired in recession and stagnation.

The recovery in the USA is extremely sluggish and fragile. Europe is in adeep recession. The former powerhouse of its growth, Germany, is on theverge of recession. The weaker economies of southern Europe are in a deepslump. Meanwhile*,* the slowdown of the Chinese economy is causing alarm,and the so-called BRICS economies are also entering into crisis.

North America, Europe and Japan account for 90% of household wealth. Ifthese countries are not consuming, China cannot produce. And if China isnot producing (at least to the same extent), countries like Brazil,Argentina and Australia cannot sell their raw materials.

Thus, globalization manifests itself as a global crisis of capitalism. Thehuge accumulation of debt acts as a colossal drag on the economy,preventing any meaningful recovery. Everywhere, in cutting livingstandards, they are cutting demand and deepening the crisis.

The attempts of the US Federal Reserve to keep interest rates low and pumpliquidity into the economy (“quantitative easing”) have proved useless forincreasing production. The capitalists borrow money at low rates and use itto speculate on the stock markets. They either use it to take over othercompanies, or to buy shares in their own companies in order to drive theprice of shares up. This explains the boom on the stock exchange at a timewhen the US economy is experiencing only sluggish growth.

Quantitative easing was a colossal gamble. They calculated that therecannot be inflation while the markets are flat. So they pumped more moneyinto the economy, hoping to get a reactivation. This was like a drug addictpumping drugs into his system in order to get a “high”. But this was apolicy subject to the law of diminishing returns. The effectiveness is, andtherefore ever bigger quantities are needed to produce the same results.

The monetarists pointed out (correctly) that sooner or later, “quantitativeeasing” must end in an explosion of inflation. This in turn will lead to asharp increase in interest rates, like a man slamming on the brakes of acar, and a new and even deeper slump. But as soon as the Fed announced itsintention to end quantitative easing, there were sharp falls on the stockmarkets all over the world. That showed both the nervousness of thebourgeois and the extremely fragile nature of the “recovery”.

There is no real precedent to the present crisis in its extent and globalcharacter. It is true that there is no final crisis of capitalism. But thebare assertion that capitalism can recover from crises tells us nothingabout the specific phase through which capitalism is passing.

The question that must be answered is: how long will it last? By what meanswill a solution be found? And at what cost? Some bourgeois economists arepredicting that it will take 20 years to solve the crisis of the euro. Twodecades of falling living standards and austerity means an explosion of theclass struggle everywhere. This is what the ruling class fears.

Not only can the ruling class not permit new reforms; it cannot permit theexistence of those gains made in the past. That is a finished recipe forclass struggle. We therefore face a future of years, probably decades, offalling living standards. This will have a profound effect on consciousness.From Turkey to Brazil

The boom in capitalism served to mask the underlying contradictions insociety, but not to remove them. The gains of economic prosperity were notevenly distributed. According to the UN*,* the richest 2% own more thanhalf the world’s wealth, while the poorest half of the world’s populationown barely 1% of global wealth.

An unbridgeable gulf has opened up between rich and poor everywhere. In thewords of Marx: “Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at thesame time accumulation of misery, agony of toil slavery, ignorance,brutality, mental degradation, at the opposite pole, *i.e.,* on the side ofthe class that produces its own product in the form of capital.” (Capital,vol.1, 25:4)

This is the economic background to the social explosions in Turkey andBrazil, which represent a sudden change in the situation. Both countrieswere held up as models of economic growth and political and socialstability. Now everything has turned into its opposite.

The impasse of capitalism finds its expression in sudden leaps ofconsciousness in the masses. Sudden and sharp changes are implicit in thesituation and we must be prepared for them. Everywhere there is a simmeringanger beneath the surface, which expresses itself as mass outbursts inTunisia, Egypt, Spain, Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria, Rumania, Brazil*, *andbeyond*.* Russia, China and Saudi Arabia are all faced with similardevelopments.

What we see is the beginning of the world revolution. Events in one countryhave a big effect on consciousness in other countries. Modern methods ofcommunication enable events to be replicated with lightning speed. TheRevolution is leapfrogging from one country to another as if the oldfrontiers had no significance.

These explosions occurred on apparently unrelated issues of an accidentalcharacter: a plan to build a shopping mall in a park in Istanbul*,* and anincrease in bus fares in Sao Paulo. But in reality, they are reflections ofthe same phenomenon: necessity expresses itself through accident. This is areflection of contradictions that have been accumulating for decadesbeneath the surface. Once the process reaches a critical point, any smallincident can set the masses in motion.

The capitalist commentators were taken completely by surprise by the eventsin Turkey. But within a matter of days similar mass protests swept acrossBrazil, the economic giant of Latin America, bringing hundreds of thousandsonto the streets. These were the biggest demonstrations for over 20 years.They exposed the contradictions that have been building up in the form ofpoor healthcare, poor education and rampant corruption.

What has so far saved the bourgeoisie is the lack of adequate organizationand leadership. This is most clearly shown in the case of Egypt.The Second Egyptian Revolution

Periods of sharp class struggle will alternate with periods of tiredness,apathy, lulls, and even reaction. But these will merely be the prelude tonew and even more explosive developments. This is shown clearly by theEgyptian Revolution.

In Egypt, after months of disappointment and tiredness, 17 million took tothe streets in an unprecedented popular uprising. With no party, noorganization or leadership, they succeeded in just a few days inoverthrowing the hated Morsi government.

The western media tried to characterise this as a coup. But a coup is bydefinition a movement of a small minority that conspires to seize powerbehind the backs of the people. Here the revolutionary people were on thestreets and were the real motor force behind events.

In every genuine revolution it is the elemental movement of the masses thatprovides the motor force. However, unlike the anarchists*, * Marxists do notworship spontaneity, which has its strong points but also its weaknesses.We must understand the limitations of spontaneity.

In Egypt the masses could have taken power at the end of June. In fact,they had power in their hands, but they were not aware of it. Thissituation bears some resemblance to February 1917 in Russia. Lenin pointedout that the only reason the workers did not take power then had nothing todo with objective conditions, but was due to the subjective factor:

“Why don't they take power? Steklov says: for this reason and that. This isnonsense. The fact is that *the proletariat is not organised and classconscious enough. *This must be admitted: *material strength is in thehands of the proletariat but the bourgeoisie turned out to be prepared andclass conscious.*This is a monstrous fact, and it should be frankly andopenly admitted and the people should be told that they did not take powerbecause they were unorganised and not conscious enough.” (Lenin, *Works*,vol. 36, page 437, our emphasis)

The Egyptian workers and youth are learning fast in the school ofRevolution. That is why the June uprising was far broader, deeper, fasterand more conscious than the First Revolution that occurred two and a halfyears ago. But they still lack the necessary experience and revolutionarytheory that would enable the Revolution to achieve a rapid and relativelypainless victory.

The situation is one of deadlock in which neither side can claim totalvictory. This is what enables the army to raise itself above society andpresent itself as the supreme arbiter of the Nation, although in realitythe real power was in the streets. The confidence expressed by some peoplein the role of the army shows extreme naivety. Bonapartism represents aserious danger to the Egyptian Revolution. This naivety will be burned outof the consciousness of the masses by the harsh school of life.

The open counterrevolutionar ies of the Muslim Brotherhood have been drivenfrom power but because of the limits of its purely spontaneous (i.e.unorganised) nature, the Revolution has failed to take power. On the onehand the Islamist reactionaries are organising a counterrevolutionar yrebellion that threatens to plunge the country into civil war. On the otherhand*,* the bourgeois elements, generals and imperialists are manoeuvringto rob the masses of the victory that was won with their blood.

The Revolution was strong enough to achieve the immediate objective: theoverthrow of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. But it was not strong enoughto prevent the fruits of its victory being stolen by the generals and thebourgeoisie. It will have to pass through another hard school in order toraise itself to the level that is necessary to change the course of history.

Revolution enables people to learn fast. If two years ago there had existedin Egypt the equivalent of the Bolshevik Party of Lenin and Trotsky, evenwith just the 8,000 members that it had in February 1917, the wholesituation would be entirely different. But such a party did not exist. Itwill have to be built in the heat of events.

The strategists of Capital were seriously alarmed by thesedevelopments. **Leavingaside all non-essential and accidental elements, these movements wereinspired and driven by the same things. What we have here is aninternational phenomenon: a tendency towards a world revolutionarymovement. We see similar developments beginning in Europe.The crisis of the euro

The crisis in Europe most dramatically expresses the sickness of worldcapitalism. The idea was to make the working class pay for the crisis byimposing austerity policies. But the willingness of the masses to acceptfurther reductions in living standards has definite limits, and these arebeing reached. In Portugal the constant pressure on living standards hasprovoked rising social and political tensions, expressed in a generalstrike and mass demonstrations that plunged the government into crisis.

The *e*uro is not the cause of the crisis, but all the attempts to save the*e*uro have forced them to adopt the line of savage austerity (“internaldevaluation”) that is pushing them all deeper and deeper into recession. Asa result, unemployment increases, the economy sickens, tax returns fail,and deficits increase inexorably.

There is a growing split between Germany and the weaker countries of thesouth of Europe, and also between Germany and France, which, because of itsweakness, is drawn closer to the South. Germany wishes to push all theburden of the crisis onto the shoulders of the weaker members of the*e*urozone,which imposes severe strains on its unity. It is not impossible that thesestrains will lead eventually to the breakup, not just of the *e*urozone butof the EU itself.

This prospect horrifies the bourgeoisie, not just on this side of theAtlantic but also in the USA. If the EU breaks up it would open the door tocurrency wars, competitive devaluations and trade wars that would set thescene for a deep slump with catastrophic effects on a world scale.

Many economists are now talking openly of the prospect of the breakup ofthe EU. For fear of the alternative, they may succeed, against all theodds, in holding something together, but even if they do, not much will beleft of the original project.

The class struggle is intensifying. Revolutionary explosions are on theorder of the day in Europe. The revolutionary potential in Europe isclearest in countries like Greece, Spain and Italy. But France is not farbehind, and the riots in Britain were a warning that such events arepossible in Britain in the next period.

The bourgeoisie is faced with a serious problem: they must take back allthe concessions they made over the past fifty years. But the class balanceof forces is very unfavourable for them.

In countries like Greece one can say that the revolution has alreadyentered its first phase. The process naturally is uneven, developing withgreater speed and intensity in some countries, especially in the South ofEurope, and at a slower pace in those countries that have accumulated alayer of fat in the last period. But everywhere the process is moving inthe same direction.Greece

In Greece there is a movement in the direction of revolution. The workersand youth have shown tremendous determination and will to struggle, butthey have not got a worked out programme to change society. That is whatthey want but they do not know how to express it, that is all. With astrong Marxist current Greece would be on the eve of insurrection. But oursmall forces are not strong enough to provide the necessary leadership.

There has been a temporary lull because the workers have gone on one24-hour general strike after another and achieved nothing. The mood remainsrevolutionary. The reformist trade union and Stalinist leaders are holdingthe class back. But the struggle over the state broadcasting company (ERT)shows that the movement can explode again at any time. Nothing has beenresolved.

The Samaras government is weak and fractious. Samaras is purely empirical.He staggers from one crisis to the next with no clear idea where he isgoing. The government is too weak to do what has to be done. It is splitand cannot last. Sooner or later the bourgeoisie will have to pass thepoisoned chalice to Tsipras and SYRIZA.

Doubtless a section of the ruling class would like to move towardsreaction. But they know that this would mean civil war, which they wouldnot be sure of winning. So they will send the workers to the school ofreformism to learn a lesson. It will be a very painful one. A SYRIZAgovernment would be faced with a clear alternative: either break with thebourgeoisie and defend the interests of the working class, or capitulate tothe pressures from the bourgeoisie and carry out the policies dictated bythe Troika. There is no third way.

Tsipras became very popular because he seemed to stand for radicalpolicies, a break with the Memorandum, etc. But as he gets close to power,he has moderated his language. He is careful not to promise too much inorder not to frighten the bourgeoisie and to dampen expectations of themasses.

However, the expectations will be very great. If a Left coalitiongovernment led by SYRIZA fails to take the necessary action against bigbusiness, it will cause a wave of bitter disillusionment, preparing the wayfor an even more right-wing coalition, possibly between the New Democracyand Golden Dawn (Khrysi Argi).

Under these conditions the Golden Dawn would grow on the right, and the KKEwould grow on the left. For a whole period, one unstable government willfollow another. Left coalitions will give way to right-wing coalitions. Butno combination of parliamentary forces can solve the crisis.

The Greek ruling class will proceed carefully, testing the ground throughthe gradual introduction of reactionary laws and measures to restrictdemocratic rights. It will attempt to move towards parliamentaryBonapartism before imposing an open dictatorship.

But long before reaction can succeed, there will be a whole series ofsocial explosions, in which the question of power will be posed. Under suchconditions, the revolutionary tendency can build its forces rapidly. TheGreek section has an enormous responsibility on its shoulders, and theGreek question must be placed high on the agenda of the whole International.Consciousness

There is a contradiction between the level of consciousness of the movementand the tasks posed by history. It can only be resolved by the experienceof the masses.

Consciousness always tends to lag behind events. But consciousness cancatch up with a bang. That is the real meaning of a revolution. The essenceof a revolution is lightning changes in the mood of the masses. Explosionscan occur suddenly, without warning, when least expected. That was themeaning of the events in Turkey and Brazil.

As the crisis deepens, the mood of the masses is changing. Everywhere thereis a backlash against the policies of austerity. This is grasped even by asection of the bourgeoisie. There are definite limits to what people canstand. These limits are being reached.

In the period of the boom, despite overwork and increased exploitation,many workers could find a way out through individual solutions, likeovertime. Now that avenue is blocked. Only through struggle will it bepossible to defend the existing conditions, let alone secure better ones.Now the psychology of the workers is changing fundamentally. There is amood of anger and bitterness.

One layer after another is being drawn into struggle. The traditionalproletariat has been joined by layers that in the past would haveconsidered themselves as middle class: teachers, civil servants, doctors,nurses, etc.

However, after decades of relative class peace, the workers need apreliminary period to stretch their muscles*,* like an athlete whosemuscles have become stiff. The school of mass strikes and demonstrationsare a preparation for more serious things. In general, the working classcan only learn from experience.

The onset of the crisis initially produced shock among the workers who didnot expect it. They were traumatised and unable to react in many cases. Butthat is now changing. In one country after another the workers and youthare taking the road of struggle and through the experience of struggle, theclass begins to feel itself as a class.

Over a period*,* all the old reformist illusions will be burned out of theconsciousness of the working class, which will become hardened in struggle.Sooner or later, this must have an effect inside the mass workers’organizations.The mass organizations

The mass organizations are lagging far behind events. In the 1930s (andalso in the 1970s)*,* mass centrist tendencies emerged fairly rapidly inthe workers’ parties. We are not yet in that stage. On the contrary, themood of fury that exists in the masses scarcely finds any reflection in themass organizations.

It is a paradox that the very organizations that were created by theworking class to change society have become monstrous barriers in the pathof the working class. Decades of capitalist boom have carried the processof degeneration of all these organizations to an extreme, both in thepolitical parties (Social Democracy and the former “Communist” parties) andthe unions.

The dialectic of history has taken cruel revenge on the reformists andStalinists. Precisely at a moment when the capitalist system is collapsing,the reformist leaders embrace the “market” even closer than before. Theyare destined to sink with it. This is a finished recipe for crises in allthese organizations in the future.

In France*,* Hollande’s electoral support collapsed in only a few months tothe lowest levels since 1958. In Greece*,* the Pasok has been almost wipedout. In Italy*,* the old Communist Party (the PCI) liquidated itself andthe PRC is rapidly disintegrating, punished by the workers for itsbetrayals in the Prodi coalition government. In Spain*,* the PSOE does notgain despite the unpopularity of the PP government.

In Britain*,* the Labour leaders are terrified of the prospect of coming topower. They do not fight for a majority. They make no promises of reforms,etc., because they fear that this will encourage the workers and unions tomake more demands. When they make speeches, they address their remarks, notto the workers but to the bosses and bankers, seeking their approval. Theyhave passed from reforms to counter-reforms.

In most countries there has been a collapse of the Left. The leftreformists are hopeless empiricists, just like the right wing. It is justtwo different kinds of empiricism. They cling to the outmoded recipes ofKeynesianism. None of them speak of socialism.

The ex-Stalinists have been punished by history for their past crimes. Theyhave moved sharply to the right, especially after the collapse of the USSRand are now not even the shadow of their former selves. They are deeplysceptical about socialism and have no faith whatsoever in the working class.

The old Stalinists were at least a caricature of the genuine article. Nowthey are only a pale imitation of reformism. Consequently, at a time whencapitalism is in a deep crisis, when the ideas of Communism ought to get abig audience, they have proved impotent to reach the most radicalisedlayers of the workers and youth. In some countries they have disappearedaltogether.

Trotsky said that betrayal is implicit in reformism. We do not speak herenecessarily of a conscious betrayal but the fact that if one acceptscapitalism, one must also accept the laws of capitalism. Under theseconditions a very critical mood will develop rapidly. At a certain point wewill see a ferment of discussion in the rank and file and thecrystallization of a left wing.

The reformists yearn for a return to “normality”, but that is a utopiandream. To manage capitalism in its epoch of decay is to manage a generalreduction of living standards. These leaders reflect the past, not thepresent or the future. There is no longer any unquestioning support amongworkers for the Socialist and ex-Communist leaders. On the contrary, thereis a critical attitude and even open scepticism towards them.

That does not mean, as the sects imagine, that these parties will simplydisappear. The reformists have deep roots in the class and can recover fromeven what seem to be impossible situations. When the masses look for analternative, they do not look at the sects, but will test and re-test thewell-known traditional parties and leaders, before they finally discardthem and look for a new political point of reference.

The workers will test one party and leader after another in a desperateattempt to find a way out of the crisis. They discard one after another.The pendulum swings to the left and the right. In contrast to the 1930s and1970s, the Left in the Social Democracy is weak. But as the crisisintensifies, there will be a differentiation inside the mass organizations.

The rapid rise of SYRIZA in Greece and the advances of Mélenchon and theFront de Gauche in France is an indication of processes that will berepeated on an even bigger scale in the next period. In both cases,however, the forces for new left-wing movements did not drop from the clouds*,* but emerged from splits in the existing mass organizations (the KKE inGreece and the Socialist Party in France).

There will be a whole series of crises in both the SPs and CPs in thefuture, which will create very favourable conditions for the growth of massMarxist tendencies.The trade unions

Trotsky said that the trade union leaders are the most conservative forcein society. That is truer than ever. Yet the workers have nowhere else togo. The mass movement can develop spontaneously, from below, withoutleadership from the top. The workers will improvise all kinds ofrank-and-file ad hoc committees and campaigns.

The anarchists and sects will see these movements as an alternative to theunions. But the working class cannot dispense with the trade unions, whichwill be drawn in later. Ad hoc organisations have a role to play, but thereis no substitute for patient revolutionary work to transform the unions.

Most of the union leaders are living in the past and are completelyunprepared for the period into which we have entered. At the very time whenthe capitalist system is crumbling everywhere, they cling desperately tothe “market” and are trying to save it at all costs – at the cost of theworkers.

But the mass organizations do not exist in a vacuum. That is especiallytrue of the unions. There will be a process of selection, in which thehopeless*,*demorali sed elements will be cast aside and replaced withyounger, more militant people who are prepared to risk their jobs for thesake of fighting the bosses and standing up for workers’ rights.

Under pressure of the rank and file, the union leaders will either putthemselves at the head of the struggle or be pushed aside and be replacedby people who are more in contact with the membership. The unions will betransformed over and over again in the course of struggle.

It would be wrong to imagine that reformism is completely discredited evennow. The masses would like to see reforms. But under present conditionseven the smallest reforms will have to be fought for. Our criticism of thereformists is not that they stand for reforms but that they do not fightfor reforms and accept counter-reforms– that they surrender to thepressures of big business.Towards the European Revolution

Three years ago the *Financial Times* spoke of “difficult and dangeroustimes”. These words have turned out to be only too true. The ruling classis terrified of the social and political effects of the crisis and themeasures it will be forced to take. What has saved the situation so far hasbeen the reformist Labour leaders who have shown themselves to be the mostloyal and reliable servants of Capital.

The classes are lining up for a decisive showdown. Over the next five orten years we will see the most serious confrontation since the 1930s Thereare many parallels between the present situation and the 1930s. But thereare also important differences.

The main difference is a radical change in the class balance of forces. Theworking class is now a decisive majority in all the advanced capitalistcountries and plays the decisive role in countries like Turkey, Brazil,Egypt and Indonesia. Before the Second World War*,* the Europeanbourgeoisie had big social reserves in the shape of the peasantry. Thatpartly explains why they could move rapidly in the direction of fascism inItaly, Germany and Spain.

Now the changed balance of class forces rules out a rapid denouement. Thepresent situation can last for years with ebbs and flows. The movement willtake place in a series of waves, as in Spain, where the Revolution, reallybegan in 1930, with a wave of strikes and demonstrations even before thefall of the Monarchy in 1931.

In a revolutionary period like this, all such lulls and defeats are merelythe prelude to new explosions, which will put all past movements in theshade. The Spanish Revolution passed through a whole series of stages,before it was finally defeated in the May Days of 1937 in Barcelona.

In these seven years there were periods of great revolutionary advances,such as in 1931 with the declaration of the Republic, but also periods ofdespair and disillusionment. There were terrible defeats like the defeat ofthe Asturian Commune in 1934, and even black reaction, as in the BienioNegro (Two Black years) of 1933-5.

Today in Europe a similar process is taking place everywhere at a slower orfaster pace and at a greater or lesser intensity. Greece is the weakestlink in the chain of European capitalism, but there are many weak links.The process in Greece has gone further than anywhere else, but it onlyshows in a particularly sharp form what will happen in other Europeancountries.

May 1968 in France was the greatest revolutionary general strike inhistory. But in some ways it was still a fairly light-headed affair. Afterdecades of prosperity the consciousness of youth was characterised by acertain naivety. Under the far harsher conditions of today, that kind ofquasi-anarchist childishness will be burned out of the consciousness of theyouth. This generation will be far harder than earlier generations, and thestruggles will also be harder and more brutal.Strategy and tactics

Strategy and tactics are not the same. It is necessary to have a generalunderstanding of the processes, but the concrete and practical applicationmay be different at any given moment*,* and tactics may even conflict withstrategy at certain periods.

We understand that at a certain stage the sharp polarization in societywill be reflected in a differentiation within the mass organizations,beginning with the trade unions.

Explosions are inevitable. But without leadership, that will not be enough.The movement to occupy squares in Spain reached very large proportions, butled nowhere and soon fizzled out. The forces of Marxism are too small todetermine the outcome of such mass movements. In most countries they arelimited to the level of propaganda. But we must be prepared.

We must develop intelligent and appropriate transitional demands at everystage. But this is insufficient in present conditions. While activelyintervening in every struggle (strikes, general strikes, massdemonstrations, etc.) we must patiently explain that only a radical breakwith capitalism can solve the problem.

A nationalised planned economy could solve unemployment by introducingimmediately a six hour, four day week without loss of pay. In ourpropaganda we must emphasize the colossal loss of production throughmillions of unemployed, the effect on the youth, women, etc.

At the same time we must explain the tremendous productive potential of thenew technologies: information, computers, “just in time” production,robots, etc. If this were put to work in a rational way, it would mean thatpeople would work fewer hours, not more, for the satisfaction of humanneeds.

We must seek out the most revolutionary elements and educate them in theideas of Marxism. In a revolutionary situation a small group with correctideas can grow rapidly - Quality can become quantity and quantity canbecome quality. The task is therefore to build the forces of Marxism with asense of urgencyat this stage are not to be found in the reformist massorganizations, in the main. At this stage it is, especially the youth arebecoming radicalised and who are open to revolutionary ideas.

The contradiction between the level of consciousness of the masses and thetasks posed by history can only be solved by the experience of great andexplosive events. But these are implicit in the situation. There will besharp turns and sudden changes, especially in consciousness.

In the past*,* revolutionary ideas would be received with scepticism. Nowpeople are looking for these ideas. In Greece, 63 percent of the people saythey want a fundamental change in society, while 23 percent want arevolution. These are extraordinary figures: in effect, 86 percent look torevolution for their salvation.

We must be imbued with the idea of a fundamental change in the situation,and the need for a sense of urgency in building a revolutionaryorganization. All routinism must be combatted. Above all, we must payspecial attention to theory and political education, without which we arenothing.

There are big possibilities. Above all, there are fresh layers of youthcoming into activity who are looking for the ideas of Marxism, not tomorrowor the day after, but right now. We must find them, enter into a dialoguewith them and win them to the ideas of Marxism.

About Me

Right To Share Food
At Right To Share Food, we believe that sharing food with our brothers and sisters is a fundamental human right. We believe that sharing food is a constitutionally protected activity, guaranteed under the freedom of association clause of the first amendment of The Constitution of the United States of America. We believe that sharing food outside and in public is an equally protected activity. Our goal is to promote cooperation among people in order to exercise and defend this right.
Hello; let me introduce myself. My name is Michael Hubman. I am the founder and the facilitator of Right To Share Food. Since 2007 I have been lobbying on behalf of the human and civil rights of homeless people. I operate Watercorps, a charity that gives bulk drinking water to the homeless people living on the streets of Skid Row Los Angeles.
Conflict occurs when government, most often municipalities, attempt to effect social engineering by restricting or forbidding the sharing of food on public property, the commons and even private property.
Michael “Waterman” Hubman
http://righttosharefood.org